3
 Nitro-Lift Techs. v. Howard (US 2012)  Arbitration and Covenants Not to Compete  Question of arbitrability of the covenant not to compete dispute was a question for an arbitrator not a court  MORAL: If you want to carve the covenant out of the arbitration provision, do it explicitly The Supreme Court

4
 Pending Cases  Vance v. Ball State University, No (June 25, 2012).  Does the Faragher/Ellerth defense apply to...  harassment by those whom the employer vests with authority to direct and oversee their victim’s daily work, OR  Is it limited to those harassers who have the power to “hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline” their victim.  PREDICTION: A supervisor does not necessarily have to have authority to hire and fire The Supreme Court

6
 Pending Cases  Sandifer v. U.S. Steel, No  What constitutes "changing clothes" within the meaning of section 203(o) of the FLSA?  Deals with the donning and doffing of Personal Protective Equipment in an industrial workplace  In a collective bargaining agreement, the employer and the union can agree that “changing clothes” is not compensable  PREDICTION: “Changing clothes” means donning and doffing of PPE and can be excluded from compensable time under 203(o) of the FLSA. The Supreme Court

13
WEC Carolina Energy Solutions, LLC v. Miller, 687 F.3d 199 (4th Cir. 2012)  One of three cases of first impression for the 4th Cir. this year  Miller was a Project Director for WEC  Had company laptop, etc.  WEC had policies prohibiting employees from saving work files to personal devices or using company resources for non- business purposes  Miller left WEC to go to a competitor and, allegedly, took a bunch of confidential information with him Computer Fraud & Abuse Act

14
WEC Carolina Energy Solutions, LLC v. Miller  Miller allegedly used WEC confidential information in a customer presentation 20 days later on behalf of his new employer  The new employer beat out WEC for the customer’s business  WEC sued, asserting various state law claims and a claim under CFAA  CFAA creates a civil claim against any individual who accesses a computer network without authorization or in excess of his authorization and causes damage of at least $5,000  Miller moved to dismiss the CFAA claim Computer Fraud & Abuse Act

15
WEC Carolina Energy Solutions, LLC v. Miller  Fourth Circuit adopted a narrow interpretation of CFAA  Joined the Ninth Circuit (YIKES!)  Court concluded that CFAA only addresses “access” to the network, not what a person does with information on the network  If an individual is authorized to access a computer network, that is the end of the discussion for CFAA purposes  “Exceeding Authorized Access” does not mean misusing data, files, etc. (or even misappropriating them)  CFAA claims are effectively dead in the employment context Computer Fraud & Abuse Act

16
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT: N O FLSA C OMPLAINT IS M INOR

17
Minor v. Bostwick Laboratories, Inc., 669 F.3d 428 (4th Cir. 2012).  On May 6, 2008, Kathy Minor (and several others) met with Bostwick’s COO  Reported that Minor’s supervisor routinely altered employees’ time sheets to reflect that they had not worked overtime when they had.  Six days later, Bostwick fired Minor  The reason given: “too much conflict with her supervisors and the relationship just was not working.”  Bostwick also claimed to have met with Minor’s co-workers and “had determined that she was the problem.” Fair Labor Standards Act

18
Minor v. Bostwick Laboratories, Inc.  Minor sued for retaliation under the FLSA  Bostwick moved to dismiss on the ground that an informal, intracompany, oral complaint was not protected activity under the FLSA  FLSA prohibits retaliation against any employee “because such employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this chapter...”  The District Court agreed and dismissed the claim Fair Labor Standards Act

19
Minor v. Bostwick Laboratories, Inc.  While Minor’s appeal was pending, the Supreme Court decided Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics  Kasten focused on the “filed” part of the anti-retaliation provision  Held than an oral complaint is “filed” when it is made  Left open the question of whether an informal, intracompany complaint satisfies the “any complaint” part of the statute  Fourth Circuit had to close the hole left by the Supreme Court Fair Labor Standards Act

20
Minor v. Bostwick Laboratories, Inc.  So, is making an informal, oral, intracompany complaint of FLSA violations protected conduct?  YES...  As long as the complaint is “sufficiently clear and detailed for a reasonable employer to understand it, in light of both content and context, as an assertion of rights protected by the statute and a call for their protection” Fair Labor Standards Act

23
Pierce v. The Atlantic Group, Inc.  Pierce was concerned about how to get the certifications completed without disruption to maintenance operations at McGuire  He formulated a training plan in order to get the certifications done with minimal disruption  Atlantic and Duke did not respond to his plan  He then was asked to take a vacation and then, while on vacation, asked to come back for a limited assignment at a lower pay rate REDA and Wrongful Discharge

24
Pierce v. The Atlantic Group, Inc.  Shortly thereafter, he was fired for falsifying his timecard (although he claimed his action was approved by his supervisor)  Basically, entered a full day of work on a Friday but then left work for a family emergency  Sued, asserting claims for violation of REDA, wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, defamation and IIED/NIED  Ds moved to dismiss, which was granted REDA and Wrongful Discharge

25
Pierce v. The Atlantic Group, Inc.  REDA CLAIM Issue of FIRST IMPRESSION  Can an internal complaint satisfy the “initiate any inquiry” prong of protected conduct under REDA?  HELD: NO, it cannot.  More than an internal complaint, or suggestion, is required.  Wrongful Discharge Claim  P must plead a specific N.C. public policy that D allegedly violated  Broad, general statutes will not suffice REDA and Wrongful Discharge

26
F EDERAL L EGISLATION

27
 Nothing on the horizon.  ACA is coming on-line over the next 2 years.  The effect will be minimal outside of the benefits area  The primary provision that is generally applicable is the breastfeeding break requirement added to the FLSA Federal Legislation

28
N ORTH C AROLINA O THER [?]

29
 N.C. State Bar Formal Ethics Opinion  Deals with an employee’s s to the employee’s personal attorney sent using the employer’s business system  Generally, if the employer has a clearly written and clearly communicated policy stating that all s sent or received on its system are the property of the employer and EE has NO expectation of privacy...  These s are NOT privileged Employee s to Counsel

30
 N.C. State Bar Formal Ethics Opinion  VERY different rules for s sent by an employee using an internet account (live.com, gmail.com, etc.) accessed from the ER’s computer system  These remain privileged  Can be SIGNIFICANT legal liability for accessing these  Primarily under the federal Stored Communications Act Employee s to Counsel

33
 Pending... S.B. 91  Passed N.C. Senate (48-2) on March 5, 2013  Now pending in N.C. House  Would prohibit employers from requiring an applicant for employment to disclose information concerning any arrest, criminal charge, or criminal conviction that has been expunged.  Seems likely to pass. Expunged Criminal Records

34
 Several bills pending that would...  allow concealed handguns in places where they are currently banned  prevent an employer from banning hand guns in employees’ cars in the employer’s parking lot Gun Control